Suzuki SX4 2010 vs Honda CR-V 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 156 NM | 192 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Honda CR-V is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki SX4 engine produces 30 HP less power than Honda CR-V, whereas torque is 36 NM less than Honda CR-V. Due to the lower power, Suzuki SX4 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki SX4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki SX4 consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V, which means that by driving the Suzuki SX4 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki SX4 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 58 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki SX4 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2007: Car features Honda`s real-time four-wheel-drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. A multi-plate clutch transfers torque to the rear axle when wheel slip is detected (pressure is applied to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work smoothly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 24 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | Used also on Honda Accord | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki SX4 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Suzuki SX4 2010 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality.
High engine timing chain lifetime.
Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. Honda CR-V 2007 2.0 engine: This engine is sensitive to both fuel and oil quality. Using low-grade gasoline can quickly damage the catalytic converter and lead to premature failure of the oxygen sensors. Many Honda owners are annoyed ... More about Honda CR-V 2007 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.15 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Suzuki SX4 is smaller. Suzuki SX4 is 37 cm shorter than the Honda CR-V, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki SX4 is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 556 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 955 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Suzuki SX4 has 286 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki SX4 is 1.2 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V, which means Suzuki SX4 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki SX4 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki SX4 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |